11 : The Printed Book in the West Since 1800 [H-40]
3-7 January 2005
1) How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: All were very useful. I would have liked to read one or two “individual” books by a leading figure in the field; e.g. Eric Gills’s essay on typography. 2: Useful and -- more than I expected -- enlightening and pleasing. 3: The readings were a good introduction to the subject. The Gaskell was slow going because of the technical nature. [You] could recommend a glossary to accompany this. 4: Extremely useful. They provided a good understanding of the material covered in class. 5: Very pertinent. 6: The pre-course readings were very important so that many ideas presented in class were already familiar. On the other hand, the readings were not as essential as those for the DesBib course. 7: The books were useful, although much of the information overlapped from text to text. The Rota book was particularly useful. 8: The readings were useful, but a bit repetitive; the Rota book was particularly good. 9: Very useful. 10: Useful; the Rota book was particularly good. The workbook was helpful as well. 11: Very useful.
2) Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?
1-2: Yes. 3: The materials shown in class were a great addition to the course. The syllabus could have been more detailed. 4: The workbook was very helpful and assisted in understanding the technical processes involved in bookmaking. 5: Very thorough; the workbook will become dog-eared from extensive reference. 6: Yes -- I will continue to use them. 7: The workbook was very useful in illustrating various aspects of printing. The syllabus was not particularly useful. 8-10: Yes. 11: Extremely useful.
3) What aspects of the course content were of the greatest interest or relevance for your purposes? Was the intellectual level of the course appropriate?
1: Fixing images of printing processes in my mind, e.g. Linotype & Monotype machine generation, stereotyping, etc. 2: History of printing, history of typography, and history of collecting. More or less, yes. 3: The history of printing and explanation of technology as well as social trends. The level was appropriate. 4: I found every aspect of the course interesting. 5: I loved the section on private presses. The show and tell from RBS and the Grolier collections were excellent. High intellectual level. 6: I particularly enjoyed seeing the development of typefaces and, even more, the technology of printing. The intellectual level was just right. 7: I was most interested in printing of books for the masses, as opposed to the information on private presses. 8: The intellectual level was appropriate. I was particularly interested in twentieth-century developments. 9: Yes. 10: Chiefly the earlier portion, although it was all relevant. 11: All of the above.
4) If your course had field trips, were they effective?
1: Yes. 2: Yes -- I wish there had been an opportunity to visit a modern printing establishment, especially since Bowne & Co. was so much fun. 3: The trip to Bowne & Co. greatly helped me to understand how a press works. It was essential. 4: Yes, the trip to Bowne & Co. was very interesting and helpful by observing the printing process firsthand. 5: Bowne & Co. was very interesting. I am ashamed that as a native New Yorker I had never heard of it. 6: I had been to Bowne & Co. before, but, even so, I learned a good deal from seeing the presses after hearing Eric’s discussions.7: Yes. The field trip was excellent. 8: The one field trip was time that was indeed well spent. I would have enjoyed one or two additional trips. 9: Yes. 10: Very much so. 11: Yes.
5) What did you like best about the course?
1: Its concentration over a five-day period. 2: The clarifications of various printing methods and illustration processes; the chance to learn about these through seeing and handling the objects under discussion. 3: The atmosphere of the class -- instructor was articulate, knowledgeable, and was adept at handling the class. Good sense of humor. 4: The knowledge of the instructor and learning with the objects at hand. 5: Subject matter. 6: The show and tell of lots of great treasures. 7: I loved seeing all the RBS and Grolier Club books. 8: The access to rare and historically significant books and other material. 9: Instructor’s knowledge. 10: The content, teaching style, and atmosphere. 11: Everything.
6) How could the course have been improved?
1: The provision of better coffee in the morning would have gotten me off to a better start! 2: I do wish EH would walk, while showing books, at a slightly slower pace. 3: [A] more detailed syllabus and bibliography. Put [name plates] in front of each student. 4: I was fully satisfied with its present state. 5: It can’t. 6: It has, I would think, already been substantially improved by holding it at the Grolier Club so that students have access to GC material as well as that of RBS. 10: More field trips, time permitting, might have been interesting. 11: I do not know.
7) We are always concerned about the physical well-being both of the RBS teaching collections and of materials owned by the Grolier Club. If relevant, what suggestions do you have for the improved classroom handling of such materials used in your course this week?
1: That we (well, certainly I) can be trusted to handle more of the materials. 2: Care and handling seemed very competent. 5: No idea -- we were all observant of the “no eating, drinking, or pens” rules in the classroom. 6: None -- [the materials were] really well handled. 11: None.
8) If you attended the Monday and/or Tuesday night lectures, were they worth attending?
1: Yes. 2: Yes -- Irene Tichenor on De Vinne was a great pleasure, in particular. 3: Great lecture. 5: Absolutely! 6: I enjoyed Irene Tichenor’s lecture. 7: N/A.. 8: I did not attend these lectures. 10: I did not get a chance to. 11: Yes.
9) If you attended Museum Night, was the time profitably spent?
1: N/A. 2: I wish we’d been able to have a Museum Night! 3: Yes, the tour of the Grolier Club was well worth it. 5-8: N/A. 11: N/A.
10) Did you get your money’s worth? Any final thoughts?
1: Yes. I would have liked to have learned a little more of EH’s personal experiences in the field, especially his stay with the Jesuits [as cataloger at Loyola University in Chicago]. 2: Yes. Get plenty of rest beforehand. 3: The course was a good introduction to the period. I recommend it to anyone who is relatively new to the field. 4: Yes, it is money well spent. 5: Yes. My advice is to take the course. 6: You bet! 7: Yes. I learned a lot. It was a great course. 8: Yes. I would consider taking similar classes in the future. 9: The course was very worthwhile. 10: Yes -- most definitely worth taking. 11: Yes.
Number of respondents: 11
Percentages
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
18% 18% 0% 0%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
27% 82% 9% 18%
N/A.: self- N/A.: Self- N/A.: stayed N/A.: lived
employed, re- employed, with friends nearby
tired, or had retired, or or lived at
summers off exchange home
55% 0% 91% 82%
There were three full-time students (27%), three book collectors (27%), two general librarians with some rare book duties (18%), one rare book librarian (9%), one free-lance conservator/editor (9%), and one part-time student (9%).